heart wrote:I have no problem with this except that I personally feel incapable to, among the huge amount of worldly Dharma systems that exist, even guess which are of short term or long term benefit. I certainly can't say if any of them will eventually lead to liberation.

All of them are Samantabhadra's vehicles.

Of course, at this point you are debating with ChNNs statement. But I will endeavor to set out what I take away from it. People have generated traditions around Dzogchen. Those traditions are secondary. The rig pa'i rtsal dbang is much misunderstood. It is not a ritual, though it can be packaged in one. The rig pa'i rtsal dbang is direct introduction. Dzogchen transmission depends solely on direct introduction. Direct introduction can be given in myriad ways, there is no set tradition.

Which of these interpretation of "tradition" do you think ChNNR intend? Because certainly some of these above does corresponds pretty good with both Dzogchen and Dzogchen Community.

Dzogchen Community is not Dzogchen, just like the thun book is not Dzogchen practice.

No matter how direct introduction is achieved, it certainly can happen in many different ways, ChNNR himself have regularly been given three special transmissions every year according to a preset and that can, at least to a certain degree be called a ritual.

Yes, there is a rite that goes with the WW transmission days. But direct introduction is not restricted to that and does not depend on that.

The Dzogchen tantras themselves maintain that no distinction is made in Dzogchen between those of higher capacity and lower capacity, good karmic accumulations or negative.

Well, Jigme Lingpa certainly do that distinction in the Yeshe Lama.

I prefer to follow what Dzogchen tantras say. Tri Yeshe Lama is important, but it is not the end all be all of Dzogchen.

Quite literally there are differences between the paths of renunciation (yānas 1-3), transformation (4-8), and self-liberation (ati).

As I have pointed out endlessly, there is a difference between Hināyāna and Mahāyāna, for example. Important differences in vows, conduct, practice, methods, etc. What is permissible in one is not permissible in the other. This also applies to Vajrayāna - what is permissible in Vajrayāna is not permissible in Mahāyāna. In Dzogchen there are no rules.

That things are different don't meant that they are incompatible or in any kind of conflict.

Dzogchen practitioners can and should eat meat. Mahāyanists should never eat meat. If you want to wish away the various contradictions that exist in the three or nine yānas, which are demonstrated in tantras such as kun byed rgyal po to be misakes and devitions, feel free.

Sakyamuni did not teach Dzogchen so far as anyone knows -- there is no record of it in the original tantras of Dzogchen.

Except that he, for example in the Vima Nyingthik, is counted among the twelve Dzogchen Buddhas.

Yes, as has been pointed out endlessly, the reason for this is not that he taught Dzogchen, but because he predicted Garab Dorje. Also, the source of the twelve teachers is sgra thal gyur.

Perhaps that Dzogchen masters aren't nearly as uptight as their followers?

Tashi delek,

What does that photo of the Dalai Lama inside a Chritian church figures ?

Does it mean that Christianity is as such venerated in Buddhism?Does it mean that in Christianity, Buddhism is accepted?Does it mean that here a kind of propaganda is put inside to get proved ones personal convictions?Does it mean that now Christus is accepted to put in the Dzogchen Lineage?Does it mean that here is only seen the Bodhisattva (Sutra) ideal which is venerated?

Maybe i should take a picture of myself in front of our Buddha, that would mean:i am a Buddhist?

Or better said i am a Dzogchenpa? Or better said I am a Tantrist. Or better said i am a Sutra follower?Or better said because the Buddha does embrace all teachers i am a Christian?

Mutsog MarroKY

An image can means what ever one want, that's why I've make no comment at first, wanted to read what anyone could say ... to publish it was not to mean anything you choose to list.What one can see in this image is HHDL, a dzogchenpa, unifying both religion (because he is also a Buddhist monk) within his practice.But maybe you though he was praying God or anything like that?

Sönam

By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.- Longchen Rabjam -

kalden yungdrung wrote:Because the sympathy for the Teachings of the Buddha one is called a Buddhist and not anymore a Muslim etc.

I agree with this approach. Having it no any intolerance and bias is needed. Also no any need for the new theory of "universal Dzogchen for every religion" or something fancy the same.

Not Dzogchen for every religion -- Dzogchen for every person regardless of religion. M

Ok, something fancy the same, as i wrote. Nearly every person has one's own religion because nearly nobody will recognize the direct introduction to Rigpa since the blank start, as I wrote in previous post. They are conceptuals systems for the survive. Among these systems only Buddhism/Bon are only the ones where complete Dzogchen survived but other are incompatible for complete realization of Dzogchen including the 4 visions.

Quite a few of us have tried (also in this very thread) to dispel the misconception that the so-called 'belief in God' must necessarily entail some actual belief or be about the God of traditional theism. It just seems to fall on deaf ears. Some Buddhists (I'm not speaking of Adamantine, btw) apparently need to believe that every Christian, Jew and Muslim believes in the literal existence of a great voyeur-sadist who once created the world and now lives hidden somewhere in the sky waiting for us to die so that he may judge us - just like they need to believe that realization is possible only in Buddhist vehicles, fullstop.

Adamantine wrote: You really think Christians, Jews, Muslims, Jains, Rastafarians, Atheists, Agnostics, Scientific Materialists, Nihilists in general.. you think they can all easily accept and participate in Dzogchen teachings and practice when a big part of it is regarding Bardos and Buddhafields? And you believe that these teachings are not Buddhist?

Who is going to spend all of their time practicing something that most likely they will never see the biggest benefit from until after they die, in the "bardo" or "pureland", when they don't believe in bardos or purelands?

Since Dzogchen is based on personal experience, anyone can practice if they are interested, no matter what they beleive. If they are not interested, what can we do? But if they are interested, they do not need to be converted to Buddhism in order to benefit from Dzogchen teachings.

You keep talking about that, "personal experience" at the same time you keep talking about the realization of Dzogchen practice not being fully accomplished until the bardo, or some time in purelands, for the majority of practitioners. So whose personal experience are we referring to here?

Since you are mainly using others experience as the basis for your view onthis (all the senior students of ChNn who do not consider themselves Buddhist, but other religions) maybe it would help to explain how they reconcile these after-death claims with their personal beliefs? Do you know? How many other religious beliefs are you aware of that are represented in the DC?

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Adamantine wrote:You keep talking about that, "personal experience" at the same time you keep talking about the realization of Dzogchen practice not being fully accomplished until the bardo, or some time in purelands, for the majority of practitioners. So whose personal experience are we referring to here?

Adamantine wrote:You keep talking about that, "personal experience" at the same time you keep talking about the realization of Dzogchen practice not being fully accomplished until the bardo, or some time in purelands, for the majority of practitioners. So whose personal experience are we referring to here?

The practitioners, of course.

So whose personal experience of the bardos and the purelands are we talking about, --which practitioners exactly?

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Adamantine wrote:You keep talking about that, "personal experience" at the same time you keep talking about the realization of Dzogchen practice not being fully accomplished until the bardo, or some time in purelands, for the majority of practitioners. So whose personal experience are we referring to here?

The practitioners, of course.

So whose personal experience of the bardos and the purelands are we talking about, --which practitioners exactly?

Experience of the bardos after death do not depend on belief or opinion. This is merely being discussed in a Buddhist framework. Whether we call a realm a Buddhafield, a devaloka, a heaven, or a realm of the Immortals matters little. What matters is the intent, and the manner of integrating one's experience at a non-conceptual level. The rest takes care of itself.

To personalize this, I have never felt the need to discard my Hindu practice nor to mix it with Buddhism. Nor have I completely eschewed ceremonial magic for that matter, though it is hopelessly limited compared to eastern systems. Each has its place as a secondary practice. Each is a tool to reach out to others. Can you really read any of the seminal texts of mystical Taoism and not find liberating instructions? What about the Ashtavakra Samhita or Avadhuta Gita? Or do you simply dismiss out of hand based on 2500 year-old refutations of Samkhya that you probably haven't even read in their entirety?

"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that"—Bill Shankly

CNNR has changed his mind about his position of considering himself as a Buddhist teacher or not 3 times, troghout the years. So I think this discussion is very relative, because CNNR's positions are very fluid and change troughout the years.

1) In the late 80's and early 90's he publicly stated he wasn't a Buddist teacher because he just taught Dzog Chen as an independent way.

2) Some years after his illness, in the late 90's and in the very beggings of 2000's he just stated: "Someone says Namkhai Norbu is not a Buddist master, but it is not true. I am a 100% buddist master. " I heard it with my hears in Merigar and I was really strucked by his radical change, and I thought he changed is mind for his personal reasons as he changed his mind about many things. For example in the previous period he laughed at people who were focused on Ngondro saying that you could have more benefits if discover your rigpa. In this period where he declared to be a 100% Buddist master he asked his SMS students to finish ngondro. Malcom said that this ngondro has to be seen in a different perspective, but the bottom line is that it is still a ngondro with the 4 practices to be accumulated

3) Now in the last years, it seems he has come back to the initial position of considering himself only a Dzog Chen master independent by the Buddhist tradition and system.

So, whishing to CNNR at least other 30 years of good health , I would not be surprised, if in the next years he would change his mind again telling that he is a 100% buddist Master.

Last edited by dorje e gabbana on Tue May 29, 2012 6:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Adamantine wrote:You keep talking about that, "personal experience" at the same time you keep talking about the realization of Dzogchen practice not being fully accomplished until the bardo, or some time in purelands, for the majority of practitioners. So whose personal experience are we referring to here?

The practitioners, of course.

So whose personal experience of the bardos and the purelands are we talking about, --which practitioners exactly?

Since you don't know the answers to these questions I suggest you ask your teacher.

dorje e gabbana wrote:2) Some years after his illness, in the late 90's and in the very beggings of 2000's he just stated: "Someone says Namkhai Norbu is not a Buddist master, but it is not true. I am a 100% buddist master. " I heard it with my hears in Merigar and I was really strucked by his radical change, and I thought he changed is mind for his personal reasons as he changed his mind about many things. For example in the previous period he laughed at people who were focused on Ngondro saying that you could have more benefits if discover your rigpa. In this period where he declared to be a 100% Buddist master he asked his SMS students to finish ngondro. Malcom said that this ngondro has to be seen in a different perspective, but the bottom line is that it is still a ngondro with the 4 practices to be accumulated

3) Now in the last years, it seems he has come back to the initial position of considering himself only a Dzog Chen master independent by the Buddhist tradition and system.

So, whishing to CNNR at least other 30 years of good health , I would not be surprised, if in the next years he would change his mind again telling that he is a 100% buddist Master.

Very interesting.

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Adamantine wrote:So whose personal experience of the bardos and the purelands are we talking about, --which practitioners exactly?

Since you don't know the answers to these questions I suggest you ask your teacher.

M

I wouldn't ask my teacher about your claims.. I am asking you.

One can understand the experience of the bardo of dharmatā and the pure nirmanakaȳa buddhafields experientially in this life, you don't have to wait. If you want to understand this experientially, ask your teacher.I am not your teacher, so don't ask me.

Dechen Norbu wrote:Perhaps you are not understanding that when I say "you", I mean "one", I mean in general. Not you particularly, Mariusz. I think it can be said like that in English.

Yes we are multikulti. As for me particulary I prefer the practical approach: Complete Nyinthig Cycle with DI right from the blank start, like in Kunzang Gongpa Kundu, but in case of not recoginizing it yet, with it's direct supports like rushen with another DI, and other following retreats with DI, with some help of tsalung, tummo, and all within indirect -general knowledge of Buddhism which is easy and quickly to learn from Lamrim. I'm not so brave to experiment with other yet incompatible supports like other religions/atheism. So I'd like the quickest

Malcolm wrote:One can understand the experience of the bardo of dharmatā and the pure nirmanakaȳa buddhafields experientially in this life, you don't have to wait. If you want to understand this experientially, ask your teacher.I am not your teacher, so don't ask me.

"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

Mariusz wrote:I'm not so brave to experiment with other yet incompatible supports like other religions/atheism. So I'd like the quickest

Yet another misconception -- no one has suggested expirimenting with other religions.

To reiterate, people may, if they are interested, learn and practice Dzogchen without converting to Buddhism or abandoning their previous faiths. What is so difficult to understand about this statement?

I have no where said that anyone should feel compelled to rush out and become a Hari Krishna. I have basically said that a Dzogchen practitioner should feel free to go anywhere and study anything they feel will be useful for their personal path.